Re: Sean Carroll on Darwin's insight into DNA as a cybernetic

On Jul 22, 8:49 pm, Mike L <mike_lyle...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dictionaries show multiple meanings for the words "OK" "your"
"objection" "justified" "in" "all" "respects" "what" "is" "thereby"
"show" "to" "be" and "true."  

Dictionaries deal with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics not
pragmatics.

They also indicate that those words' meanings have changed over time and place.
We are dealing with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatics not
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics. The semantics changes but the
concept James Hutton, Aristotle, Epidimus, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Louis_Maupertuis,
Patrick Matthews, William Charles Wells and Halloy had must be
interpreted in their time era with their knowledge and their logical
fallacies such as Tautology and Circular reasoning. Furthermore their
belief system which according to Tremaux was that the will is an
illusion must be taken into consideration. The world around us is
interpreted from various apriori commitments to metaphysical world
views. Chiefly these are the belief that in the beginning was either
Matter or Mind. My belief that Mind came first as opposed to the
atheist belief that Matter came first which is like one person
believing the earth is flat while another that it is round. These two
world views cannot be reconciled because each world view is projecting
a specific pragmatics but using the same words.

In the paper I am reading by Berlinksi he is refuting "Darwins theory
of Evolution". Darwin never formulated a theory but a "proposition
which cannot be disputed" or a tautology. One can't refute a tautology
because it can't be disputed , hence isn't a theory. Darwin's
tautologies are not addressed with reference to Genes as a cybernetic
abstraction because he didn't know about genes. Darwin's plagiarizing
of Mathews tautology must be addressed in the context of their
knowledge and belief systems, not in terms of what we know today.
Aristotle's tautologies are best addressed by showing the how he
formulated his propositions so that it can't be disputed. Information
theory is a separate issue which needs to be addressed in our context.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Sean Carroll on Darwins insight into DNA as a cybernetic
    ... concern themselves with pragmatics. ... Not if you want to discuss evolutionary science. ... fallacies such as Tautology and Circular reasoning. ... Matter or Mind. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Tautology in Soul of the White Ant
    ... That hardly sounds like a tautology to me. ... fittest" could be misconstrued as a tautology. ... Darwin's intent or pragmatics was with NS - he is dead and we can't ... So not knowing their intent we need to ask ourselves wether the next ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Wikipedia trashes the Tautology article.
    ... dividing line between a Truism and an observation is pragmatics. ... Neither is Begging the question a tautology. ... independently establish the real reason for the viewpoint elsewhere. ... are the semantics that encodes your concept for me to decode. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Survival of the Fittest: What was Darwins pragmatics?
    ... After all this time and noise, you still don't know what "pragmatics" ... or "tautology" mean, and don't know anything about evolution. ... simply stupid and unteachable, aren't you? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Wikipedia talk page on Natural Selection
    ... have a single true meaning, ... thus you couldn't say anything about genes but only ... its relation to man's power of selection. ... See we can focus on his tautology which has nothing to do with the ...
    (talk.origins)